Submitted to veg-raw by: Peter Brandt <[log in to unmask]>

>>A feeling of compassion ...
>>These feelings are part of who we are and should not be trivialized.

>    Indeed they should not. Yet, in nature eating living beings for  survival
>occurs all the time and the implication of your sentiment,  which I
>happen to share, is that animals that kill are less spiritually  evolved than
>human beings

   I have nothing to say about the spiritual evolution of carnivorous
animals.  If I tried, it would be pure conjecture.

>or that native cultures, which always have  had
>some animal foods in their diets, are more primitive than we  civilized
>vegans.

   Well, do you not feel that each generation "stands on the shoulders" of
the last?  Do you think it's arrogant to try to find a better way to live?  I
tried very hard not to come across as "holier-than-thou," but perhaps this
is not possible when discussing ethics/ideals.

>(Another implication is that it is worse to kill an  animal than it is to kill a
>plant, which could easily be interpreted as  a form of species elitism).

   I don't have an answer to this, except to say that the damage to plant
life is less when we eat them directly than when we process them
through animals.  Also, maybe this is a good argument for
"mostly-fruitarianism," because picking the fruit doesn't harm the plant.

> By the way we human beings treat each other  and how we are
>trashing the planet, it seems the reverse is true.

   Since most "civilized" people are not vegans, it's pretty hard to make
this comparison.

>The  way we treat animals in raising them for food is cruel & brutal, but
>not necessarily the act of killing for food.

   I can't think of a way to kill an animal (except maybe a tamed farm
animal) that is not cruel.  Do you have any examples?

>Also, by not eating animal  foods we might be living in denial of our own
>roots & of our  nutritional needs, as we evolved as human beings with
>always a  percentage of these foods in our diets.

   I don't see how it's "living in denial of our roots" to exclude animal
products, any more than wearing clothes, living in houses, going to
school, writing Email, etc. etc.  I'm more concerned here with nutritional
needs.  Incidently, I don't think that just because early humans did
something, that means we have to, or even that it's the best thing.  My
(limited) understanding is that these early peoples, as well as more
modern aboriginal peoples, were not very long-lived.
   Not that it's necessarily germane, according to a Web article by Laurie
Forti (http://www.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/sciarg.htm), Jane Goodall has
observed that meat is about 1.5% of the average chimp's diet.  That's a
whole lot less than most humans eat, at least the ones I know.

>Besides, turning our backs to  the hunter and gatherer life-style and
>becoming farmers is what caused  all the problems to begin with.
>Farming led to civilization, which led  to overpopulation, the destruction
>of most of the natural habitats for  wild animals and to factory farming
>with all its cruelty to animals.

   Yes, I certainly agree with you here.

>If veganism is more a way of dealing with all our guilt rather than a
>viable solution to our health & to all the problems facing humanity,

   I thought is was both!!!

>we might be doing ourselves and the planet a great disservice by not
>taking a closer look at our own beliefs.  In order to uncover the truth  I
>think it is vital that we do not pay allegiance to any authority, as  we
>are running out of time and cannot afford many more mistakes.

   Once again, I agree.  Except that I perceive that you have more
confidence in the ability of humans to pull together toward a common
goal than I have.

>>Snip stuff about raw meat vs cooked beans<
> Were this only the case I would rejoice and would agree with you
>100%.  But what we are seeing, more and more, is an increasingly
>number of  people on long-term vegan diets running into serious
>dediciences

   Can you give me more specifics?  The nutritionists on the other veg-
lists claim that all nutrients except b-12 can be obtained from a
well-balanced vegan diet, and there's even some controversy about the
b-12.  Nutritionists, of course, only know about the nutrients that have
been discovered...

>and  seemingly unable to reach any balanced state of health.

So, you think the difference in health is not minuscule, but large?   :-(

>Just the other  day ran into a raw food vegan advocate, the author of a
>fairly well -  known book on the subject, who has now incoporated
>animal foods into  his diet. He looked fit & athletic as always and
>claimed to be doing  better than during his years as a raw vegan (he
>was an essene to boot).  I know of 3-4 other raw foods advocates,
>who also have books out, who  have made similar transitions.  There is
>a definite trend here, and by  ignoring it we would be keeping our
>heads buried in the sand.

Yes, I agree.  You seem to be focusing on raw-vegans here.  You don't
mention if these people tried adding back certain cooked foods before
resorting to animal foods.  In other words, were they more "attached" to
the veg- or to the -raw?

> I believe that you are raising very legitimate concerns, and I share
>them whole-heartedly. I'm very attached to vegetarianism and have
>been   identified with this lifestyle for most of my life. And that should
>be  respected. Yet, remaining in denial in spite of the overwhelming
>evidence to the contrary, because the truth is too painful, is no
>solution either. Either way, these are by no means easy questions and
>need to be dealt with in a respectful manner.

I'm not sure, but you may be saying that my post was not respectful.
Just in case, I'll respond.  My only point was that if we are
compassionate, that is a bona-fide, legitimate piece of we are.  Perhaps
we are more evolved than our ancestors.  Why is it bad to suggest such
a thing?

>As a vegan with an identity crisis...

Boy, you've said a mouthful here.
One of my favorite daydreaming games is, "If I were the Goddess..."  I
come up with some beauts, but the deeper I go, the more I'm convinced
that there are no easy answers.

>I understand that the decrease in sex drive happens mostly on the raw
>vegan diets, but not if some raw animal foods are included. Putting  this
>into an evolutionary perspective we would probably had died off  long
>ago had our ancestors been raw vegans. :/

And now may I say something really controversial?  I don't think a
decrease in sex drive would be a bad thing.  At least for a few
generations until we get our numbers down a bit (or a lot!).  This idea that
we are not "real" men/women unless we are extremely randy is an idea
whose time has GONE, IMNSHO.

>Best, Peter [log in to unmask]

Cheers again,
Martha